Software Patents Secure in India: Madras HC Clarifies 'Technical Effect' in Landmark CRI Ruling

In a significant judgment for the technology and intellectual property landscape, the Madras High Court, in the case of Ab Initio Technology LLC v. The Controller of Patents & Designs, has set aside the Patent Office's refusal of a computer-related invention (CRI)- "Graphic Representations of Data Relationship". Delivered on November 4, 2025, the ruling offers a crucial clarity on the interpretation of Section 3(k) of the Patents Act, 1970, affirming that software-based inventions can be patented only if they exhibit a "technical contribution" or "technical effect". Section 3(k) excludes “a computer programme per se or algorithms” from the domain of invention.

THE CORE OF THE DISPUTE: TECHNICAL EFFECT

Ab Initio's invention aimed to solve the complex problem of tracing data lineage, which means, how data moves and transforms within distributed, heterogeneous data systems by generating user-configurable data lineage diagrams. The Patent Office had rejected the application, arguing it was merely an "algorithm" and a "computer programme per se" and lacked novelty and inventive step under Section 2(1)(j).

The High Court, presided over by Hon’ble Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy, emphatically disagreed and provided a two-fold analysis.

Overcoming Section 3(k): The Court held that the invention provided a technical solution to a technical problem. It recognized that the claimed method, system, and architecture produce a tangible technical effect, which is, reducing query response time and offering a dynamic, efficient method for querying data lineage that superseded the tedious manual process. This approach aligns Indian law with the more liberal jurisprudence of the European Patent Office (EPO), moving away from the "exacting standard" of requiring a direct impact on novel hardware or the internal working of the computer.

Satisfying Inventive Step: On the question of novelty and inventive step, the Court found that the cited prior art (D1) focused on managing relationships between entities (e.g., people, organizations), whereas Ab Initio's invention focused distinctly on tracing data lineage (tracking data transformations and evolution). The Court concluded that a Person Skilled in the Art (PSITA) would not have arrived at the claimed invention without ingenuity, thereby satisfying the requirements of Section 2(1)(j).

KEY TAKEAWAY FOR TECH INNOVATORS

The judgment reinforces the principle that not all computer programs are barred from patentability. If a CRI, without novel hardware, improves system functionality, or enhances efficiency beyond the normal operation of a computer, it is likely to be patentable in India. This ruling is a strong affirmation of India's progressive stance on protecting software-driven technical innovations.

The Court allowed the appeal and directed the Patent Application to proceed to grant on the basis of the last submitted claims.

Article by - Zoha Khanam